cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Art Cullen

https://www.stormlake.com/articles/2019/07/17/markets-lost

A Very, Very Bad Person but he makes a valid point. When it comes to food security, nobody wants to be at the whim of an unpredictable partner.

The damage to US agriculture will continue to be felt for many years.

 

15 Replies
Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Art Cullen

That article makes quite a few valid points for sure.  Most of the realist already know the main point because of the tariffs and quick trade deal that after 2 years now still hasn’t happened China will be the guys ahead in the end.  They’re not expecting ever to be reliant on the US for AG ever again regardless of the outcome.  IMO along with and because of climate change FOOD will be the most crucial resource of all next to water of course.  This administration has backed us in a corner that may never be corrected to what we (US agricultural) already had going for us.  

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: Art Cullen

It’s pretty sad when folks think that China is a predictable trade partner.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Art Cullen

Still can get an ear full regarding Jimmy Carter's 1980 grain embargo on the Soviets.

I guess farmers weren't patriotic back then?

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Art Cullen

Predictable maybe, but highest GDP as well as population per capa surpassing India.  It’s definitely hard to not consider them at the top of the list.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Art Cullen

I'm only interested in policies that work.

In the realm of the possible, TPP and aligning as much of the developed world (who also have their grievances) as possible to get some compliance from China would have had a fair chance of improving our situation- both economically and geopolitically.

This never had much of a chance.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: I wonder if all those ...

I wonder if all those farmers who swore up & down that China just had to buy our soybeans are willing to admit that they were wrong?  I wonder what they think about the government spending $28 billion of taxpayer money to compensate farmers for what the Chinese had been paying for at no cost to the taxpayer?

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: Art Cullen

It`s a nice spin that the "US isn`t a reliable supplier of soybeans" but the truth is, "we won`t buy US beans unless we get the long end of the stick on intellectual property and we sell 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 back to the US".  The tariff revenue from the Walmart junk more than pays the small trade disruption payments that farmers receive.  

President Xi`s strategy isn`t some "ancient Chinese secret" he`s sucking it up until November 2020 in hopes that a less proud American will be elected president and policies will be reversed.  If the unthinkable does occur and Xi`s wager pays off...Uff-dah it`ll won`t be  pretty concessions that a new president will make to get a "early win on trade". 

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Not to get too political but...

Not to get too political, but  they don't have to wait for the next election.   I don't if you've noticed but nobody, not even trump is talking about intellectual property or business practices in China anymore.  China has called trump's bluff twice and now they're calling all the shots.

  It's not that the goals weren't laudable but the negotiation strategy was unsound and execution was terrible.  You can't beat a nation the size of China into submission, you have to convince them to come along.  That requires just the right of  amounts of carrots and sticks, not a bloody hammer.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Not to get too political but...

My apologies to Mr. Cullen.

This is a more serious part of the site and I shouldn't have employed the sort of snark that is necessary at Forum as a pre-defense against the flock of angry flying monkeys that are waiting to pounce.

0 Kudos